1 / 16

Technology Acquisition

Technology Acquisition. Norm Thorpe General Motors Corporation April 22, 2002. Gov’t Funded R&D Over Time. Pre-World War II Air Corps Act of 1926 World War II Manhattan Project Post World War II (Cold War) National Labs, NASA, DARPA Post Cold War Searching for solutions.

dyani
Télécharger la présentation

Technology Acquisition

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Technology Acquisition Norm Thorpe General Motors Corporation April 22, 2002

  2. Gov’t Funded R&D Over Time • Pre-World War II • Air Corps Act of 1926 • World War II • Manhattan Project • Post World War II (Cold War) • National Labs, NASA, DARPA • Post Cold War • Searching for solutions

  3. Commercial R&D over Time: GMC • Technology Driving Market Success • Electric Starting/Lighting/Ignition • Interchangeable Parts • All steel bodies • Automatic Transmission • Diesel Electric Locomotive • 1939 World’s Fair: Futurama

  4. GMC R&D, cont • Firebirds: gas turbine cars • Commercial gas turbine Class 8 trucks • Patriot Missile Gen sets • Electric Vehicles and Advanced Batteries • Fuel Cell Vehicles • Catalytic Converters • Light Weight Structures • Crash Test Dummies

  5. Institutional R&D Model • Large free standing research institutions • Academic outlook • Metrics: papers published, patents obtained • Prestige factors, cadre of professionals • Cost center approach • high costs typically buried by allocation over multiple business units • Vertical integration: Corp. self sufficiency

  6. Commercial R&D in C 21 • Large institutional R&D labs gone • or greatly reduced • Alternate solutions: • “leverage” • at best: cost share • worst case: dilution of goals/results • transfer to suppliers • contract out • move expense down supply chain

  7. GM Approach to R&D • Advanced Technology Work [ATW] • Science Lab • Innovation Programs • WWP/Purchased R&D/LOTM purchasing • Single Mission Challenge Teams • Product Engineering Centers • Collaborative Labs • USCAR

  8. R&D Acquisition Methods Continuum • Purchase Order • Modified P.O.s: • Non evaluation commitments • IP flexibility • Joint R&D Agreements • Teaming Agreements • Equity Relationships

  9. Purchased R&D and Engineering Services • Not joint R&D • Not difficult or unusual • unless buyer is a government agency! • Engineering/R&D in Source Selection • price/pay methodology • follows SOW • negotiated at market rates

  10. Collaborative Labs • Universities • Institutions • Equity Partners • Automotive OEM Alliance Partners • Joint R&D Partner Companies

  11. Joint R&D Agreements: Non-Standard ! • Embedded within larger relationships • Teaming Agreements • Equity Investments • Strategic Alliances • Consortia • Umbrella/Master agreements • Free standing projects • Walk before running?

  12. Joint R&D Agreements: Variable Factors • Who is paying? Is there cost sharing? • Who is bringing IP? Other resources? • What is the pre-existing relationship? • What future relationship is expected? • Are there anti-trust issues? • Can program results be shared/allocated? • Is there a need for leadership by one party?

  13. Joint R&D Agreement: Content • Statement of Purpose • Funding Agreements • Program Management Process • Competition Issues, if any • Confidentiality/Intellectual Property • SOW w/Payment Milestones, Deliverables • Legaleze

  14. Joint R&D: Issues (Usual Suspects) • Confidentiality/Non-Confidentiality • Ownership/control/allocation of program IP • Commercialization issues • allocation of upside • access to/compensation for background IP • free riding competitors

  15. Conclusion • Between companies, pricing issues are important as they effect budget, but are rarely controversial or difficult • Commercialization issues which are so difficult for collaborating companies, should be no-brainers for Gov’t/Corp • But only if gov’t negotiators are competent and empowered

  16. And a modest proposal: • Melt down R&D Acquisition regs • Repour with goal of permitting user of new products/technologies to buy what is needed on terms necessary to get it • enforce business discipline by holding buyers accountable for success of their deals • de-emphasize pricing issues, focussing efforts on real issues in negotiation

More Related